The price for my privacy is $30 and falling. Last year I was approached by an organization to participate in a research project. The project is sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and prominently advertised Stanford and the University of Michigan as members. I was impressed by the credentials and signed on. The task was to complete one survey per month for a year or two. They said it would take about 30 minutes per survey and they would pay me $10 for each.
The early surveys were mostly political questions; not surprising given the heated primaries going on at the time. They asked my opinion on a range of political topics and about an exceedingly long list of major and inconsequential candidates. I complained to them about redundancy and tedium but put up with it for the sake of Science.
The third or fourth survey introduced medical questions. I answered the first few but started to get uneasy about the depth of questioning about my personal medical history and that of my family. Given what they already knew about my political views, I felt like they were getting too personal and collecting information that I was uncomfortable sharing. Despite their privacy policy and promises and despite their academic credentials, I decided that they couldn't necessarily follow-through on protecting my privacy as they promised. I quit the project mid-survey.
The emails and calls followed. They needed me in the project. I was "hand selected" and couldn't be replaced. I told them my concerns and they assured me I didn't have to answer any questions that made me uncomfortable. I hemmed and hawed, still not convinced they could safeguard my privacy given the accumulated data. Finally, they offered me $30 per survey. I relented. After all, I was contributing to Science. In the process I discovered that the price of my privacy is $30.
Actually, I'm not sure it's that expensive. I seem to be giving it up for free daily. And so are millions of others. I joined Facebook a few months ago. What a pecular experience that has been. It's fun to find people you haven't spoken to in years and make them "friends". Once friends, they are privvy to your status updates, photos, comments, and posted conversations with other "friends". And you are privvy to theirs. It is fun to share such things with close friends but, in practice, it often doesn't work that way. You end up befriending a large variety of close friends, long lost friends, distant relatives, casual acquaintence, and people you're not quite sure you actually know. It's hard to turn down a "friend" request. After all, doing so may be construed as a significant snub, creating a real-world enemy.
Every "friend", despite the closeness or lackthereof to you is privvy to the same personal information. To share a private moment with close friends you must also give that moment over to notsoclose acquaintances. Even if you think you are only including close friends you are probably wrong. Recently several security researchers revealed how easy it is to spoof an identity on social networks. And to get inside the confidential circles of real-world friends of this spoofed person.
I consider myself a fairly private person. Well, I used to think so. But that is inconsistent with today's electronic communication and social media. I give up my privacy every time I post to Facebook. I am more than a little bit aware about the implications. After just a couple of months I do so without thinking much about it. After all, I have approved of all these "friends".
But, it goes beyond that. Recently I noticed that, if a friend comments on a photograph of a friend of theirs but a complete stranger to me, I can then view the entire roll of photographs of that stranger, including personal comments from additional strangers who have no idea who I am and probably have not considered that I or anyone equally strange to them can see what they have written. I'm not sure if this is a feature of Facebook or a bug. I don't think it matters.
To use social media you must give up the notion of personal privacy. Despite privacy policies and promises, information leaks are inevitable. Anything you do can and will be seen by anybody who wants to, eventually. This is not a new warning. There have been many stories of job applicants losing positions based on ill-advised posts to Myspace. The warnings are "don't post anything that you wouldn't want your mother or future boss to see". But, I don't think that really captures the issue.
I think the warning/slogan should be "get used to life without privacy". It's a fight we aren't going to win if we want to take advantage of electronic communications and social media. Your boss can already read all your work email. Just assume she will read your personal email as well, if she wants to. Google collects all your emails and search data. People are fighting to restrict what Google does with that information. Assume the worst. Advertisers will connect all the dots. They know who you are and what you like. They will use that information.
I'm not writing this as a warning or premonition of a scary future. It isn't necessarily scary to share more of yourself. I've experimented with this a little with this blog. I don't put any restrictions on who can read it and post things I would have previously called private. My friend calls my blog "insanely personal". I'm not so sure. I kind of like sharing. It's nice to take the risk of revealing something I previously kept hidden. It's a little exciting. I cross my fingers that nothing I write will come back to haunt me but I'm reconciled to the possibility that it might.
Losing privacy can be scary. Everyone has things they don't want the world to know about. Secrets. Skeletons in the closet. But, if we got used to everyone sharing their skeletons with everyone else, I'm not sure it would be so scary anymore. If I know your secrets you have less motivation to exploit mine. A world without privacy may be refreshing in its honesty and fairness. We may find we prefer to share our secrets with the world. And besides, we may already be choosing to do so, whether we acknowledge it or not.
Posted with LifeCast
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Friday, November 7, 2008
Virtual Fences And Babymoons
My wife works on a project in geomessaging. As far as I understand, geomessaging is a technology that ties your location to messages you receive on a mobile device (eg cell phone). There are many applications of this technology including social networks and (of course) directed advertising. For example, let's say you "opted in" to receive advertisements about sales on a product you wanted to buy. When you passed nearby a store selling that product you might receive a text message with a coupon for that product. Or let's say you "opted in" to let the system keep track of your facebook friends. The system might inform you when you were near one of your friends. Maybe even give you their location.
This "opted in" phrase is important. If you are like me that last example could be a little scary. It borders on stalking. So privacy concerns are an issue and there have to be mechanisms for you (and your friends) to selectively opt in and out as desired.
The system works using a concept they call "virtual fences". Objects of interest are surrounded by an imaginary circle of a predefined radius. When you get within this radius (using a gps or assisted device) you trigger the system to tell you about the object. The technical challenges are to keep track of the relationship between fences and moving devices in an efficient way that doesn't drain your battery or swamp the system with messages.
So what does this have to do with babymoons? First, what is a babymoon? I had never heard of this until recently. Apparently, someone decided that expecting parents should take a honeymoon-like trip before the baby is born. An opportunity to spend time together before the hectic days of newborn care arrive. It's a sweet idea. Our friends told us about it (I'm still not convinced they didn't make it up) and insisted we give it a try. They went for a week in Antigua. We went for a weekend to the Jersey shore in October.
It turned out to be a good idea. While not a trip to the Caribbean, it was fun to hang around with my wife and talk and relax without interruption. We stayed at the same bed and breakfast we had stayed at for our mini-honeymoon a few years back (notice a trend?). This time we were on a higher floor than previously. On ascending to this floor we noticed an oddity in the stairwell. While the first flight of stairs was normal width, the next two flights were half-width, sharing the space one flight would normally fit. This may seem like an odd observation but, when your wife is 6 months pregnant you experience confined spaces more directly.
I don't know anything about architecture but, I was curious about this stairwell and why it was designed that way. Is this a common thing to do or did the architect make a mistake and try to recover without starting over? I guess I could have asked the owner of the bed and breakfast. Instead, I thought about my wife's project. It would have been neat to have a virtual fence around that stairwell. Then I could press the "architecture" button on my phone to learn all about it while I was on the stairs (other guests might have preferred I proceed to my room first and unblock the stairs; hopefully, this hypothetical and virtual fence would permit that).
Technology limitations currently prevent virtual fences around stairwells. More realistically, the fence would be around the whole building. I could subscribe to an architecture-curious social group. When "opted in" I would get text messages about interesting architecture near my location. With links to more details. If I was active in this group, I could add the details myself in a wiki-like-way. The system would tag my entry with my gps location and create a virtual fence. I might even talk to the owner of the bed and breakfast to get information. Probably not time well spent on a babymoon, though. Despite the neat new (and imagined) technology, sometimes it's best to be "opted out".
Posted with LifeCast
This "opted in" phrase is important. If you are like me that last example could be a little scary. It borders on stalking. So privacy concerns are an issue and there have to be mechanisms for you (and your friends) to selectively opt in and out as desired.
The system works using a concept they call "virtual fences". Objects of interest are surrounded by an imaginary circle of a predefined radius. When you get within this radius (using a gps or assisted device) you trigger the system to tell you about the object. The technical challenges are to keep track of the relationship between fences and moving devices in an efficient way that doesn't drain your battery or swamp the system with messages.
So what does this have to do with babymoons? First, what is a babymoon? I had never heard of this until recently. Apparently, someone decided that expecting parents should take a honeymoon-like trip before the baby is born. An opportunity to spend time together before the hectic days of newborn care arrive. It's a sweet idea. Our friends told us about it (I'm still not convinced they didn't make it up) and insisted we give it a try. They went for a week in Antigua. We went for a weekend to the Jersey shore in October.
It turned out to be a good idea. While not a trip to the Caribbean, it was fun to hang around with my wife and talk and relax without interruption. We stayed at the same bed and breakfast we had stayed at for our mini-honeymoon a few years back (notice a trend?). This time we were on a higher floor than previously. On ascending to this floor we noticed an oddity in the stairwell. While the first flight of stairs was normal width, the next two flights were half-width, sharing the space one flight would normally fit. This may seem like an odd observation but, when your wife is 6 months pregnant you experience confined spaces more directly.
I don't know anything about architecture but, I was curious about this stairwell and why it was designed that way. Is this a common thing to do or did the architect make a mistake and try to recover without starting over? I guess I could have asked the owner of the bed and breakfast. Instead, I thought about my wife's project. It would have been neat to have a virtual fence around that stairwell. Then I could press the "architecture" button on my phone to learn all about it while I was on the stairs (other guests might have preferred I proceed to my room first and unblock the stairs; hopefully, this hypothetical and virtual fence would permit that).
Technology limitations currently prevent virtual fences around stairwells. More realistically, the fence would be around the whole building. I could subscribe to an architecture-curious social group. When "opted in" I would get text messages about interesting architecture near my location. With links to more details. If I was active in this group, I could add the details myself in a wiki-like-way. The system would tag my entry with my gps location and create a virtual fence. I might even talk to the owner of the bed and breakfast to get information. Probably not time well spent on a babymoon, though. Despite the neat new (and imagined) technology, sometimes it's best to be "opted out".
Posted with LifeCast
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Plane In A Box
When I was younger I had a recurring dream. I dreamt I was walking through a grassy plain, maybe a meadow, with a small box under my arm. Let's say it was roughly a twelve inch cube. It looked like a miniature wooden crate, dark brown with a rough surface. I would proceed to walk until I reached a small hill, still grassy, no trees or shrubs in sight. It was usually a sunny day, bright and optimistic.
I would proceed to climb the hill. Imagine the perspective from slightly above and behind; a young boy, brownish-blondish hair blowing in a subtle breeze. It wasn't one of those dreams where you climb forever and never get anywhere. This was a small hill. Every step promised something but, I wasn't in a hurry. I slowly climbed to the top.
At the top of the hill I unfolded the box and, immediately, I had a small plane. Big enough for the pilot and maybe one passenger behind. I really only imagined the oval space where I sat as pilot so I can't say what the rest of the plane looked like. I think it had a rounded nose and wings mounted just below the seating area. Definitely not one of those planes with a wing overhead. That would have obscured the view from above and I always viewed the plane from above and slightly behind the passenger.
Yes, the passenger. From nowhere there would appear a girl my age with long brownish hair that hid her face. She was always in the dream but I never saw her face. We would suddenly be in the plane, flying high with only sky in the background. Again, the view in the dream was slightly above and behind, seeing only the back of the head of my long brown-haired passenger.
We never spoke. Just flew through the sky in a warm, bright, comfortable silence. My dream girl girl and me. The dream would always end that way. The flight wasn't long, though I can't recall how long. We didn't go anywhere. There were no views of the land from above. The whole point was just to be flying with the girl whose face I never saw and whose voice I never heard.
During the day I would sometimes imagine who she might be. I'd even give her a face. Features that were familiar. I'd hope to meet her. And if I did, I wanted it to be just like in the dream. Flying on a warm breeze, through a clear sky, in a plane that unfolded from a box that tucked under my arm.
Posted with LifeCast
I would proceed to climb the hill. Imagine the perspective from slightly above and behind; a young boy, brownish-blondish hair blowing in a subtle breeze. It wasn't one of those dreams where you climb forever and never get anywhere. This was a small hill. Every step promised something but, I wasn't in a hurry. I slowly climbed to the top.
At the top of the hill I unfolded the box and, immediately, I had a small plane. Big enough for the pilot and maybe one passenger behind. I really only imagined the oval space where I sat as pilot so I can't say what the rest of the plane looked like. I think it had a rounded nose and wings mounted just below the seating area. Definitely not one of those planes with a wing overhead. That would have obscured the view from above and I always viewed the plane from above and slightly behind the passenger.
Yes, the passenger. From nowhere there would appear a girl my age with long brownish hair that hid her face. She was always in the dream but I never saw her face. We would suddenly be in the plane, flying high with only sky in the background. Again, the view in the dream was slightly above and behind, seeing only the back of the head of my long brown-haired passenger.
We never spoke. Just flew through the sky in a warm, bright, comfortable silence. My dream girl girl and me. The dream would always end that way. The flight wasn't long, though I can't recall how long. We didn't go anywhere. There were no views of the land from above. The whole point was just to be flying with the girl whose face I never saw and whose voice I never heard.
During the day I would sometimes imagine who she might be. I'd even give her a face. Features that were familiar. I'd hope to meet her. And if I did, I wanted it to be just like in the dream. Flying on a warm breeze, through a clear sky, in a plane that unfolded from a box that tucked under my arm.
Posted with LifeCast
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Personal Hoovercraft
I can't wait for the day when people have personal hoovercraft instead of cars. That future has been imagined in many movies. I recall the Star Wars version where the sky is filled with craft that are carefully computer-controlled to stream over "streets" in the sky. My version doesn't look like that. In my version it's just you and your personal craft floating up from your house into the sky. I know everyone else must be up there too, and there'd have to be some sort of solution to the traffic control and accident potential problems but, after it's all solved, it's just you and you craft up there, automatically going whereever you want, effortlessly.
Maybe it would look more like dragon flies cascading over a field. I saw that the other day. I was watching my son at soccer practice. The fields were muddy from recent rain and gnats were everywhere. But then I looked up and saw this amazing sight. The sky was filled with dragon flies, as big as small birds. I imagine they were feasting on all the gnats. They were at multiple heights streaming in random directions and it was beautiful. It reminded me vaguely of that Star Wars movie but it was better. I wanted to take a picture with my cell phone but I knew it wouldn't come out. It would look like gray sky with indistinguishable specks and that picture would replace my memory and ruin it forever. So I just stared for a while and tried to capture it in my head. It's there now and I'm enjoying it until it fades away.
I wonder what would happen to the streets when we all have personal hovercraft. We'd only need to takeoff and land, vertically. I guess the streets would make good channels for low-level flying but that hardly seems necessary. No, the streets would be up for grabs. Local streets would make wonderful wide avenues for walking, running, biking, etc. Ripping the streets up for development would be considered but what would we do about the utilities that run under the streets? Most streets would stay as paths, for people above and utilities below.
The really interesting impact would be the highways. We would have millions of acres of new land in prime locations. Well not really new land. It's always been there. And it had previous uses that were disrupted by the highways. But those uses are long gone and we could start over. The highways through the countryside might revert back to open land, farms and forests but what about the highways through and around cities? Big swaths of land amidst skyscrapers.
I worry about these newly discovered swaths of real estate and how we might fight over them. Developers wanting more skyscrapers and naturalists wanting parks. Would we preserve them as open space for the public or auction them off to the highest bidder? Or would they become huge parking lots for all the commuting hovercraft? Oh, I hadn't thought of that. That would be unimaginative and depressing. But, the hovercraft would have to park somewhere. Unless.... Unless you could take your hovercraft and fold it into a little box to carry with you. That seems like an impossible dream and reminds me of a recurring dream I had as a child. But, I'll save that for another post.
Posted with LifeCast
Maybe it would look more like dragon flies cascading over a field. I saw that the other day. I was watching my son at soccer practice. The fields were muddy from recent rain and gnats were everywhere. But then I looked up and saw this amazing sight. The sky was filled with dragon flies, as big as small birds. I imagine they were feasting on all the gnats. They were at multiple heights streaming in random directions and it was beautiful. It reminded me vaguely of that Star Wars movie but it was better. I wanted to take a picture with my cell phone but I knew it wouldn't come out. It would look like gray sky with indistinguishable specks and that picture would replace my memory and ruin it forever. So I just stared for a while and tried to capture it in my head. It's there now and I'm enjoying it until it fades away.
I wonder what would happen to the streets when we all have personal hovercraft. We'd only need to takeoff and land, vertically. I guess the streets would make good channels for low-level flying but that hardly seems necessary. No, the streets would be up for grabs. Local streets would make wonderful wide avenues for walking, running, biking, etc. Ripping the streets up for development would be considered but what would we do about the utilities that run under the streets? Most streets would stay as paths, for people above and utilities below.
The really interesting impact would be the highways. We would have millions of acres of new land in prime locations. Well not really new land. It's always been there. And it had previous uses that were disrupted by the highways. But those uses are long gone and we could start over. The highways through the countryside might revert back to open land, farms and forests but what about the highways through and around cities? Big swaths of land amidst skyscrapers.
I worry about these newly discovered swaths of real estate and how we might fight over them. Developers wanting more skyscrapers and naturalists wanting parks. Would we preserve them as open space for the public or auction them off to the highest bidder? Or would they become huge parking lots for all the commuting hovercraft? Oh, I hadn't thought of that. That would be unimaginative and depressing. But, the hovercraft would have to park somewhere. Unless.... Unless you could take your hovercraft and fold it into a little box to carry with you. That seems like an impossible dream and reminds me of a recurring dream I had as a child. But, I'll save that for another post.
Posted with LifeCast
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Fantasy Weather
I play fantasy football. This is my third season. It's amazingly popular with football fans. There are websites, magazines, radio, tv, etc all devoted to discussing statistics, strategy, injuries, who to start, who to sit, who to trade, who might be available on waivers...
I think I'm getting ahead of myself. A brief explanation of fantasy sports (yes, there are fantasy leagues for baseball, basketball, and who knows what else - but I only follow football): you get to pretend you own a football team in ways cosmetically similar to really owning a team. Your team is chosen from players across the real teams of the NFL. Your team has certain requirements for players in several positions and you try to satisfy those requirements each week through things like a draft or trades or waivers. Your team is part of a league with other teams owned by friends or strangers. The league is usually hosted by a sports-themed website with tools to help you manage all the complexity. Each week you have a competition against another team in your league. Points are awarded based on how your players do in the real NFL games that week. For example, a running back might get points for yards gained and touchdowns scored.
Fantasy football can be great fun for football fans. It connects you with your friends in game-like competition and gets you more involved being a fan of a sport you already like to follow. It's part social networking, part multi-player gaming, part many other things. And there's lots of money being spent and made all around. The real leagues (eg NFL) strengthen their fanbases. The industry around the fantasy league (websites, etc) includes opportunities for subscriptions, advertising, and even gambling.
But, what if you don't like football or other mainstream sports? Can you still enjoy a fantasy league? Well, let's see what we need. We need something to follow that changes weekly in predictable ways but retains uncertainty (fantasy football owners can predict the generally high-scoring players but injuries, weekly matchups, gameplanning by coaches, emergence of new players and decline of older players all add considerable uncertainty that makes the game and the sport interesting). We also need a source of statistics that can drive the websites and tools that manage the game. Obviously, it should also be interesting to follow and talk about with your friends (or strangers). How about the weather?
Everyone cares about the weather. It's a safe conversation topic for any occassion with any audience. Often, when I am with someone I don't know well (or even with people I do know well) and there is an awkward silence I blurt out something about the weather. Not very interesting or original but it lets us connect for a brief time. Weather has many real-time feeds that you can tap into to build websites and monitor statistics. And, of course, weather is predictable in limited ways, retaining considerable uncertainty.
So how would fantasy weather work? What would owners own? How about cities? Each owner could draft 10 cities (from an international pool) and figure out which 5 to start each week and which to keep in reserve. What about points? Weather statistics, of course. Let's see ... rainfall, temperature, wind, maybe even pollen count. We could add devastating events like hurricanes, tornadoes, and even earthquakes (not strictly a weather event) but that might make the game depressing.
Seattle would be a high draft pick for it's rainfall but you'd want to keep an eye on the waiver wire to pick up a gulf city during huricane season. You'd have a city or two that is warm all the time but you could grab a sleeper city during a heatwave. Unseasonably mild temperature might be considered an "injury". You'd have to monitor the city's condition until it improved. You might need to consider China gameplanning and drop Beijing when rumors of cloudseeding arise (though that might just backfire, unpredicably).
Fantasy weather would not be confined to any single season, you could play all year long. You could have daily, weekly, monthly or even hourly games. Anyone could own a team. Teachers could use it in the classroom to liven up geography, statistics, or other topics. Using fantasy football in the classroom might alienate a large percentage of the class but, who could complain about fantasy weather?
Would fantasy weather be as interesting and exciting as fantasy football? Not to football fans but we could make it just as exciting to everyone else. The weather channel would immediately set up a website and use the sport to promote its "real" league. The usual advertising and money-making schemes would follow.
Does anything besides weather and sports qualify for this treatment? Hmmm.. how about the stock market? Oh, I think people are already playing this game. Fantasy stocks are backed by real portfolios. That's probably too expensive a game to play causually, even for a die-hard fan.
Posted with LifeCast
I think I'm getting ahead of myself. A brief explanation of fantasy sports (yes, there are fantasy leagues for baseball, basketball, and who knows what else - but I only follow football): you get to pretend you own a football team in ways cosmetically similar to really owning a team. Your team is chosen from players across the real teams of the NFL. Your team has certain requirements for players in several positions and you try to satisfy those requirements each week through things like a draft or trades or waivers. Your team is part of a league with other teams owned by friends or strangers. The league is usually hosted by a sports-themed website with tools to help you manage all the complexity. Each week you have a competition against another team in your league. Points are awarded based on how your players do in the real NFL games that week. For example, a running back might get points for yards gained and touchdowns scored.
Fantasy football can be great fun for football fans. It connects you with your friends in game-like competition and gets you more involved being a fan of a sport you already like to follow. It's part social networking, part multi-player gaming, part many other things. And there's lots of money being spent and made all around. The real leagues (eg NFL) strengthen their fanbases. The industry around the fantasy league (websites, etc) includes opportunities for subscriptions, advertising, and even gambling.
But, what if you don't like football or other mainstream sports? Can you still enjoy a fantasy league? Well, let's see what we need. We need something to follow that changes weekly in predictable ways but retains uncertainty (fantasy football owners can predict the generally high-scoring players but injuries, weekly matchups, gameplanning by coaches, emergence of new players and decline of older players all add considerable uncertainty that makes the game and the sport interesting). We also need a source of statistics that can drive the websites and tools that manage the game. Obviously, it should also be interesting to follow and talk about with your friends (or strangers). How about the weather?
Everyone cares about the weather. It's a safe conversation topic for any occassion with any audience. Often, when I am with someone I don't know well (or even with people I do know well) and there is an awkward silence I blurt out something about the weather. Not very interesting or original but it lets us connect for a brief time. Weather has many real-time feeds that you can tap into to build websites and monitor statistics. And, of course, weather is predictable in limited ways, retaining considerable uncertainty.
So how would fantasy weather work? What would owners own? How about cities? Each owner could draft 10 cities (from an international pool) and figure out which 5 to start each week and which to keep in reserve. What about points? Weather statistics, of course. Let's see ... rainfall, temperature, wind, maybe even pollen count. We could add devastating events like hurricanes, tornadoes, and even earthquakes (not strictly a weather event) but that might make the game depressing.
Seattle would be a high draft pick for it's rainfall but you'd want to keep an eye on the waiver wire to pick up a gulf city during huricane season. You'd have a city or two that is warm all the time but you could grab a sleeper city during a heatwave. Unseasonably mild temperature might be considered an "injury". You'd have to monitor the city's condition until it improved. You might need to consider China gameplanning and drop Beijing when rumors of cloudseeding arise (though that might just backfire, unpredicably).
Fantasy weather would not be confined to any single season, you could play all year long. You could have daily, weekly, monthly or even hourly games. Anyone could own a team. Teachers could use it in the classroom to liven up geography, statistics, or other topics. Using fantasy football in the classroom might alienate a large percentage of the class but, who could complain about fantasy weather?
Would fantasy weather be as interesting and exciting as fantasy football? Not to football fans but we could make it just as exciting to everyone else. The weather channel would immediately set up a website and use the sport to promote its "real" league. The usual advertising and money-making schemes would follow.
Does anything besides weather and sports qualify for this treatment? Hmmm.. how about the stock market? Oh, I think people are already playing this game. Fantasy stocks are backed by real portfolios. That's probably too expensive a game to play causually, even for a die-hard fan.
Posted with LifeCast
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Twitters And Facebooks And Blogs
My wife decided I needed a facebook account. Then I got an iPhone and went app crazy including a twitter app. Now I have a blog. Oh, I also have a linkedin account (my wife, again). Lots of technology to express myself and keep track and be tracked by friends and colleagues and friends of friends of colleagues of friends. But, unfortuntately, all this technology didn't make me more interesting. It didn't make me go more places to share with "friends". It does make me feel a little bit more connected and give me the appearance of having more connections, maybe even more friends (maybe).
Speaking of connections, where do you draw the line? My brother wants me to linkedin with him but we are not in the same field so I don't see the point. Students from my days as a professor want to linkedln, some I know well and some I don't remember at all. Someone who graduated from my high school but whom I embarsssingly don't remember (sorry- it was a very large class) wants to be a facebook "friend". So, now I am confused. If I express myself to my friends and colleagues I am also being tracked by "friends" and "colleagues" and I find that a bit creepy. This blog might help me get over that. Since ANYONE can see it (though there is no evidence that anyone has) there is no line between friends and "friends" and strangers. It's time to get over the illusion of privacy. Might as well move into the world where anything I ever say or do is public knowledge. Isn't that where we are all going anyway? I probably should get a YouTube account next.
Ps To continue my theme of spellchecking from earlier, I was amused that "needed" above was changed from "nerded". At least this technology is protecting me from public Freudian slips.
Pps an update from earlier: I did try to comment on this blogging app and request a horizontal input feature. But iTunes decided that I was using an already taken screenname and, rather than giving me chance to correct it, digarded everything I'd typed; thus letting me maintain my streak of failing to publicly comment on apps and retain my illusion of anonymous use (for the record, it was a positive review).
Posted with LifeCast
Speaking of connections, where do you draw the line? My brother wants me to linkedin with him but we are not in the same field so I don't see the point. Students from my days as a professor want to linkedln, some I know well and some I don't remember at all. Someone who graduated from my high school but whom I embarsssingly don't remember (sorry- it was a very large class) wants to be a facebook "friend". So, now I am confused. If I express myself to my friends and colleagues I am also being tracked by "friends" and "colleagues" and I find that a bit creepy. This blog might help me get over that. Since ANYONE can see it (though there is no evidence that anyone has) there is no line between friends and "friends" and strangers. It's time to get over the illusion of privacy. Might as well move into the world where anything I ever say or do is public knowledge. Isn't that where we are all going anyway? I probably should get a YouTube account next.
Ps To continue my theme of spellchecking from earlier, I was amused that "needed" above was changed from "nerded". At least this technology is protecting me from public Freudian slips.
Pps an update from earlier: I did try to comment on this blogging app and request a horizontal input feature. But iTunes decided that I was using an already taken screenname and, rather than giving me chance to correct it, digarded everything I'd typed; thus letting me maintain my streak of failing to publicly comment on apps and retain my illusion of anonymous use (for the record, it was a positive review).
Posted with LifeCast
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)